Argues that the United States’ refugee program is less driven by considerations of foreign policy and national interest as it had been in the past and considers the resettlement of Somali Bantus as a case in point. Both historians and resettlement practitioners get information about: (1) the U.S. position, as well as that of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), on resettlement to third countries; (2) the problem of protracted refugee situations in Africa, which are characterized by high levels of social tension and physical violence; (3) the U.S. as the desired destination of those in refugee camps in Africa; (4) early efforts to find a permanent home for Somali Bantus in East Africa; (5) alleged bias on the part of U.S.-based resettlement agencies against intra-regional resettlement; (6) public versus private funding of resettlement efforts; (7) alleged corruption within the refugee resettlement business; and (8) potential reform of the refugee program, including building accountability into the system. It may be necessary for the U.S. to directly reward countries in refugee-producing regions that agree to become third-country resettlement destinations.
